Baldwin v. Canfield
Supreme Court of Minnesota
The plaintiffs Baldwin and the State National Bank of Minneapolis brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county against the defendants Thomas H. Canfield, William S. King, and the Minneapolis Agricultural and Mechanical Association praying that a certain deed from King to Canfield, and a certain instrument purporting to be a deed from the Agricultural and Mechanical Association to Can-field, (each of which purported to convey certain real estate of the…
Read the full summary
The plaintiffs Baldwin and the State National Bank of Minneapolis brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county against the defendants Thomas H. Canfield, William S. King, and the Minneapolis Agricultural and Mechanical Association praying that a certain deed from King to Canfield, and a certain instrument purporting to be a deed from the Agricultural and Mechanical Association to Can-field, (each of which purported to convey certain real estate of the association,) might be cancelled, and for other relief. The defendant Canfield was alone served with process, and Answered.…
1Opinion of the Court
Berry, J.*
The court by which this case was tried below finds the following facts:
The State National Bank of Minneapolis is, and for more than six years prior to the commencement of this action was, a corporation created and organized under the laws of the United States as a national bank, located at Minneapolis» The Minneapolis Agricultural and Mechanical Association, in June, 1871, became a body corporate, duly created and organized under the general laws of this state, and, as prescribed in its articles of incorporation, the general nature of its business was the promotion of the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- McNeil v. . the Tenth National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Grymes v. . HoneNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Sherman v. FitchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
- Doren v. Mayor of New-YorkNew York Court of Chancery · 1842
- Bank of Middlebury v. Rutland & Washington RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by68 opinions
- Parker v. Bethel Hotel Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1896
- Button v. HoffmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
- Aransas Pass Harbor Co. v. ManningTexas Supreme Court · 1901
- Gibson v. ManuelMississippi Supreme Court · 1988
- Rehn v. FischleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.